The Instigator
el_tecnico
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
gotleib
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Football and basketball ought to be undergraduate degrees.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
gotleib
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: Select Winner
Started: 7/1/2014 Category: Sports
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 536 times Debate No: 58394
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

el_tecnico

Pro

Debate formatted as follows:

Round 1- Accept

Round 2-Openings (No rebuttals!)

Round 3-Expansion of ideas, rebuttals allowed

Round 4-Only rebuttals accepted

Round 5-Closing

Questions in the comments, looking forward to an interesting debate.
gotleib

Con

i accept your debate.
Debate Round No. 1
el_tecnico

Pro

The relationship between scholastic and athletic participation we have here in the United States is unique to this country for one key reason: in a country this massive, schools provide the infrastructure necessary for competent athletic competition. Beyond this, the ties between an education and the multibillion dollar behemoth that is college sports is nonsensical. Because of how ingrained sports are with the university system in the United States, separating the NCAA from the schools remains impossible. Regardless, I have three reasons why the ideal way to mitigate the effects of forcing these athletes to also be students is making football, basketball, and other profitable college sports undergraduate degrees.

1. The commitment needed to perform at the high level college athletics require is similar to that of an undergraduate degree.

2. Unmotivated athletes take up valuable seats in classes they have no business being in.

3. A degree in a sport would allow athletes to truly become students of the game, and more easily get to the next level.

I will expand on these points as the debate continues and demonstrate why college athletics and academics would improve with the introduction of sports degrees. I am looking forward to hearing what the other side has to offer.
gotleib

Con

Schools are meant to be schools, and not exactly places that provide undergraduate degrees for sports. By considering the fact that less than 2 percent of NCAA Athletes actually go into pro sports (Business Insider), this would easily show how sports like football and basketball should NOT be undergraduate degrees.

Not only such, but it would degrade the fact that schools are actually places for learning things instead of places where people go to play sports. Athletics are a great way of providing optimal health and people who are very motivated to do good things. But one thing is without a doubt. Sports have no place in the scholar community. They have no benefit to society, and the only jobs available for football and basketball are pro. That is why many people who play these in college still put school ahead of other things such as football and basketball.

This would be to show many things about it. But also saying that a scholarship is not about that, but also consider who would go in for these undergraduate degrees. Very few people would actually do such for many reasons, such as many kids who get a scholarship or want to get a degree understand that there are more reasons than football that they would accept the degree. They want a successful future, and that is the very important thing to them.
Debate Round No. 2
el_tecnico

Pro

1. The commitment needed to perform at the high level college athletics require is similar to that of an undergraduate degree.

Con asserts that "schools are meant to be schools," and cites the dearth of students playing sports professionally, undermining that scale of college athletics, in terms of both commitment from the players and revenue for the schools. An NCAA survey showed that athletes spent upward of 40 hours a week with their sport[1]. That's more than the time commitment necessary for college classes; that's the time commitment necessary for a full-time job.

The work these students put into their sports reaps billions for their schools: the University of Texas produced $165,691,489 in revenue from athletics[2]. Certainly schools ought to be schools, but these numbers make it clear that they are doing more than just educating.

2. Unmotivated athletes take up valuable seats in classes they have no business being in.

Con continues to perpetuate the myth of the successful student-athlete, claiming that "many people who play these in college still put school ahead of other things such as football and basketball." However, a CNN survey showed that football and basketball players at the University of Georgia averaged an ACT score 18.75, a whole 33% lower than the rest of the student body [3]. The title of that CNN article, "Some athletes play like adults, read like fifth-graders," accurately captures the problems with forcing athletes to learn when they're only interested in playing football.

An college degree for one of these athletes might be giving them the chance for a successful future, but its giving that chance to the wrong person. There are people who would do anything to be in a college classroom, who have put in the work in high school, and just don't have the money. These are the people who deserve a degree, not the better football player. Furthermore, making college sports a degree doesn't prevent a student from minoring in something else and getting something useful from college.

3. A degree in a sport would allow athletes to truly become students of the game, and more easily get to the next level.

Lastly, making competitive college sports degrees would allow athletes to do what they love safely and with less injury. The 40 hour work week wouldn't be in addition to classes, and this would allow for better rested athletes and a better product on the field.

Sources:
[1] CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com...)
[2] USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com...)
[3] CNN (http://www.cnn.com...)
gotleib

Con

1. The commitment needed to perform at the high level college athletics require is similar to that of an undergraduate degree.

Pro has asserted that the commitment needed to perform at the high level college athletics require is similar to that of an undergraduate degree. This is obviously wrong. Yes, they do need the 40 hours that are stated from the NCAA article, but think of it this way. Less than 2% of those people who get these undergraduate degrees would actually get employment, and most of the employment opportunities would come mid-college, which would destroy the chances for getting the degree.

Link Used For Source: http://www.businessinsider.com...

2. Unmotivated Athletes have no place being in valuable seats in classes they have no business being in

This is false. To have Athletes that are taking up seats, this is a greatness to society. One thing that is known about high school athletes is the fact that they are required to do school work and sports. For football for example, during the season, they spend a good 15 hours after school doing direct practice. 3 1/2 hour practices. Therefore, that would be to say that students in these grades should discontinue their education for their sport because the education portion is so hard. From someone who was a student athlete, I understand that there is a time for school and there is a time for sports. But don't we all do things we don't want to do in this world that might be time consuming? By saying that a baseball player for example, shouldn't need to be educated in anything other for baseball and should be focused completely on baseball would be like saying someone who makes typewriters should focus on making typewriters and not focus on organizing the papers or learning how to put in the ink, and maybe be able to use and test these typewriters. Good spelling doesn't come from hitting a ball or catching a football. It comes from hard mental work, and by excluding that idea from athletes that they are required to do that, that is almost denying them the freedom of speech.

3. A degree in sports would allow them to truly become students of the game

This is really confusing. First of all, going back to the article, lets say that they learn all of this stuff, and they graduate. First of all, if they are not recruited by the NFL or the NHL or the NBA or the MLB, than they are given this degree that has no usage. This degree is unusable practically. It would only create more people to get dead end jobs to try and pay off these degrees.

One thing that the pro fails to understand is that getting a degree in this would be like getting a degree in playing games. Most of what you get in a sport is a skill set, and a sport is a game in the end with physical requirements. It would be like getting a degree in chess, which does not exist, because nobody would have the interest to get one.

I do not protest the idea of having another opportunity for people who play football or basketball to go to another type of academy that focuses on having a strong athletic program more than colleges, like Don Bosco High School, but still having an education program. I think of colleges like universities, and universities are made to learn things, not to study a game.
Debate Round No. 3
el_tecnico

Pro

el_tecnico forfeited this round.
gotleib

Con

I rebut that since they were a forfeit of the round, I have to assume that there was nothing to rebut, so therefore, every point made before was unable to be rebutted to.
Debate Round No. 4
el_tecnico

Pro

el_tecnico forfeited this round.
gotleib

Con

No comment
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
el_tecnicogotleib
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture